I've been enjoying these posts. Naturally I'm one of the "population" as well. Usually I don't work with graph paper and ruler, but rather go out in the zone I'm planning, with stakes and possibly flagging tape, and perhaps a measuring tape if it's a really big job. Smaller areas just get the eyeball and sometimes a good deal of thought. I think a garden designer, professional or not, can be defined as a person who understands that whether a plant is in one spot, or else a foot away, makes a difference. Makes THE difference. We are finally enjoying gorgeous sunny weather and I've been out digging in the big garden, amending the gray clay with copious amounts of old hay, and planting. It's a slow job: today I got one rose ('Mme. Jules Bouche'), one rosemary, one lavender, a white iris, a "mentuccia"--some kind of catmint?--in the ground in my five hours of labor, but still, this is what is going to turn this former steep weedy field into a garden one day. I had one little area I was trying to make sense of. It was a short, wedge-shaped strip with the garden road above and a narrow path below, bounded on one end by a thriving young 'Cl. Maman Cochet' on a pergola entrance, and on the other end by a young Italian pine with Artemisia abrotanum growing around it. I had amended this ground and planted various things there last fall and the year before that. Two roses, 'Camelia Rose' and a lovely Tea, perhaps 'Dr. Grill'; a common privet above, a rosemary, a pink, some odds and ends. The roses both died. A couple of stakes mark plants that are no longer there. The rosemary, pinks, and privet made it. The privet is too low below the road for comfort. There's nothing at the corner of the pergola entrance, so I planted another rosemary there. In spite of earlier amendment, the ground looks unprosperous, and I think the roses' deaths are partly due to stress from the bad soil, so I dug and amended generously, not being yet finished. I decided that there was room only for one rose, but want to add a shrub honeysuckle, L. fragrantissima, to the green border above, joining the privet, which I won't move, and rosemary. I need a couple more green shrubs for the border besides the honeysuckle. I may have to move the pink, perhaps on the slope of the rose hole once I've re-dug it. All the amendment raises the ground a bit above the path, which is pleasant, but my plans leave a low open area beside 'Cl. Maman Cochet' that I don't know what to do with. It's too small for a rose, but something choice needs to go there. It feels sheltered. It sits at a curve in the path. Actually I think it might be just the right place for a bench. I love this kind of problem solving, and it seems a very reasonable activity to me. I consider I'm spending my time fruitfully. And, even though DH and I appear to be the only people on earth who enjoy my garden, still I'm improving the soil and helping prevent slides, and giving a home to a good variety of roses, some of them uncommon. Melissa

Maybe we can repost this with a note NOT to reply that way it stays at the top? Is there a way we can sticky this?

That did occur to me also, Christopher. But the description was written by Charles Lemaire, an eminent botanist, who vouches that the illustration is an accurate depiction of the rose. That same illustration is then referred to in the same German publication that says the rose has a red center and no thorns. I think that's weird, but I also think it points to the primary source as being considered reputable. And it seems unlikely to me that the description and illustration would be published without feedback/ correction from the breeder, given that this was a cultivar being advertised for sale for the first time. And the publisher of L'Illustration horticole was also selling the rose- introducing it in Belgium. If you can find a retraction or correction, that would indeed be of interest. But assuming that you doubt the original description, the question is: does the modern version of RdV have a red or crimson center? No- so far as I can see, it has a white or whitish center. So either you go with the very first description and illustration introducing a red-thorned 'RdV' to the world, or you go with the thornless rose with the red or crimson center. Neither of these early descriptions quite fit what is in commerce today. At this point, I'm mostly curious about why RdV disappeared to the point that her absence was lamented in the 1904 Journal des Roses, but she is now one of the more famous of the old rose cultivars. I think it is a false assumption that RdV has been popular and available continuously since her introduction in 1860. I want to search American catalogs (or any catalogs, but I seem to mostly only have access to American ones via the Biodiversity Heritage Library) to see who carried it and when. I know that Peter Henderson Nursery of NYC carried RdV from 1872-1880 (and possibly before, but the earliest catalog I find is 1872). Her absence from other catalogs is remarkable. She is also listed in the 1880 Baudriller catalogue (Angers, France). I'm hoping to get a better feel for who liked her, who sold her, did she really disappear and- if so- when did her 20th C. revival begin, and who began it? If anyone knows of a free online source for old British/European nursery catalogs, I'd appreciate a heads up. Virginia

Oh, yes! I've been to Hastings. SE of St. Paul. It's a beautiful place! I've seen photos of the Gothic Revival LeDuc House and would dearly love to tour it. Lucky you living so close to the S Kedem nursery! Although I now live on the West Coast, I've been tempted to order from SK which sells Rosa pomifera and carries a modest but very nice selection of Rugosas. I truly miss MN. I moved from TX and thought I might remain in the snowy north, but it wasn't to be. I still treasure my Scandinavian sweaters, and I drove vintage Volvos until I adopted my daughter, when safety and reliability took precedence. :-) Sometimes I Google images of MN locations just to "visit" again. Thank you for posting rosy images of my former homeland and for reminding me of the wonders of Hastings, including your delightful, historical rose! I'm going to encourage my Twin Cities friends to visit Hastings, sneak some sidewalk "tours" of private front gardens and visit the SK nursery again this spring. Carol